DOCSLIB.ORG

Reporting Principles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reporting Principles COMMON SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY EU BATTLEGROUPS Updated: January 2011 Battllegroups/07 Full operational capability in 2007 The European Union is a global actor, ready to undertake its share of responsibility for global security. With the introduction of the battlegroup concept, the Union formed a (further) military instrument at its disposal for early and rapid responses, when necessary. On 1 January 2007 the EU battlegroup concept reached full operational capability. Since that date, the EU is able to undertake, if so decided by the Council, two concurrent single-battlegroup-sized (about 1 500-strong) rapid response operations, including the ability to launch both operations nearly simultaneously. At the 1999 Helsinki European Council meeting, rapid response was identified as an important aspect of crisis management. As a result, the Helsinki Headline Goal 2003 assigned to member states the objective of being able to provide rapid response elements available and deployable at very high levels of readiness. Subsequently, an EU military rapid response concept was developed. In June 2003 the first autonomous EU-led military operation, Operation Artemis, was launched. It showed very successfully the EU's ability to operate with a rather small force at a significant distance from Brussels, in this case more than 6 000 km. Moreover, it also demonstrated the need for further development of rapid response capabilities. Subsequently, Operation Artemis became a reference model for the development of a battlegroup-sized rapid response capability. In 2004 the Headline Goal 2010 aimed for completion of the development of rapidly deployable battlegroups, including the identification of appropriate strategic lift, sustainability and disembarkation assets, by 2007. Within this context and based on a French-British-German initiative, the EU Military Staff (EUMS) developed the battlegroup concept, which was agreed by the EU Military Committee (EUMC) in June 2004. Since then, work has been taken forward, based on an agreed roadmap. It was concluded in October 2006 with the delivery of a single battlegroup concept document. PRESS - Tel: +32 (0)2 281 7367 [email protected] www.consilium.europa.eu/csdp Basic features A battlegroup is the minimum militarily effective a credible and coherent, rapidly deployable force package capable of stand-alone operations or for the initial phase of larger operations. It is based on a combined-arms, battalion-sized force, reinforced with combat-support and combat service-support elements. In their generic composition, but depending on the mission, battlegroups are about 1 500 personnel strong. Timeline EU action Approval Council decision Forces start implementing appropriate of CMC to launch operation mission in JOA NOT FIXED NLT 5 days NLT 10 days Readiness Deployment BG In-area preparations Battlegroups are based on the principle of multinationality and could be formed by a framework nation or by a multinational coalition of member states. Interoperability and military effectiveness are key criteria. A battlegroup is associated with a deployable force headquarters and pre-identified operational and strategic enablers, such as strategic lift and logistics. Member states may also contribute niche capabilities, providing specific elements with added value for battlegroups. Battlegroups are on standby for a six-month period and should be initially sustainable for 30 days, extendable to 120 days if resupplied appropriately. Operations HQ • not deployed OHQ • not part of the BG package BG package Force HQ • including staff + CIS support and augmentees • could be based on a brigade level HQ (F)HQ • deployed in theatre Battle Group (Inf Bn and choice of …..) Combat Infantry Combat Service Support Battalion Support Operational and Strategic enablers (choice of …) Air Sea Logistics Special Forces 2 Tasks Based on the Headline Goal 2010, which places the emphasis on rapid response and deployability, the EU has progressed well in further developing its military capability. Battlegroups will be employable across the full range of tasks listed in Article 43(1) of the Treaty on European Union and those identified in the European Security Strategy. They are combat-trained and their full potential would be best realised in tasks of combat forces in crisis management, bearing in mind their limited size. Battlegroups' operations would as a rule be conducted under a UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR), although operations could be envisaged where a UNSCR would not be necessary (e.g. for evacuation of EU citizens). Standards, training and certification To qualify as an EU battlegroup, the battlegroup packages have to meet commonly defined and agreed military capability standards. Standards and criteria embodied in the BG concept and the BG preparation guide form the basis for member states to develop specific instructions to ensure coherence between the constituent parts of the battlegroup package, taking into account the requirements of multinationality. A basic principle is that the battlegroup training is the responsibility of the Member states concerned. The EU facilitates coordination among member states. The certification of battlegroups also remains a national responsibility of the contributing member states. The EU Military Committee, assisted by the EU Military Staff, monitors the battlegroup certification process, which must be undertaken according to established EU-agreed procedures. Training is a key requirement for battlegroups. Member states concerned conduct a series of exercises in this regard, prior to taking a battlegroup standby period. The certification of the battlegroup package by member states will provide the EU with the necessary assurance that it is ready for a possible mission. The operation commander, who will be appointed by the Council on a case-by-case basis, has the authority to tailor the command and control structure and the battlegroup package assets and capabilities to the specific requirements of the operation. EU battlegroup commitments Member states conduct the generation of a battlegroup package and are responsible for offering a complete package formed by a framework nation or by a multinational coalition of member states. The battlegroup package has no fixed structure and thus provides member states with the necessary flexibility to form their own battlegroup package. This could lead, for instance, to battlegroups with a mountain or amphibious capability. This flexibility aims at facilitating smoother force generation and a broader spectrum of capabilities. Member states offer their battlegroup packages at the six-monthly EUMS-chaired Battlegroup Coordination Conference (BGCC). The planning horizon of the BGCC is five years. It is up to the member states how they constitute a battlegroup package and for what time frame it will be offered. The last BGCC, held in October 2009, confirmed that standby periods are completely subscribed until 2011. Member states have committed several other battlegroup packages for the period beyond. Member states putting together a battlegroup on standby, or to be on standby within the next 18 months, also offer an operation headquarters. Member states may invite non-EU European NATO countries, other countries 3 which are candidates for accession to the EU and third countries to take part in battlegroups as troop-contributing nations. Furthermore, the establishment of some battlegroups is based on multinational coalitions of EU member states, such as EUROFOR. The role of the battlegroup concept The battlegroup concept provides the EU with a specific tool in the range of rapid response capabilities, which contributes to making the EU more coherent, more active and more capable. This concept enables the EU to respond rapidly to emerging crises with military means, taking into account the size and capabilities of the battlegroups on standby. The battlegroup concept also has the potential to be a driver for capability development and for making the armed forces of member states more capable of undertaking rapid long-range deployments. Significantly, the need for additional strategic lift capabilities is underlined by the battlegroup concept. Furthermore, the concept emphasises the need for accelerated decision-making. Not only do the EU bodies need to be ready but the national decision-making processes need to be synchronised to meet the demanding timelines. Setting up a battlegroup package is an opportunity for enhanced military cooperation between member states. This improves mutual knowledge of each other's capabilities with regard to military means and political decision-making. Finally, the battlegroup concept reinforces the EU's military identity in a concrete manner. The European Union battlegroups Since the battlegroup concept was agreed in June 2004, much has been achieved. With the full commitment of member states, the battlegroup concept has already shown its potential value in securing increased cooperation and capability development among member states. It has contributed to enhancing the EU's capability to deal with rapid response and will continue to do so. In November 2009 the Council approved guidelines for improving the flexibility and usability of battlegroups. The common security and defence policy (CSDP) shall be an integral part of the common foreign and security policy. It shall provide the Union with an operational capacity drawing on civilian and military assets. The Union may use them on missions outside the Union for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter. The performance of these tasks shall be undertaken using capabilities provided by the member states. The common security and defence policy shall include the progressive framing of a common Union defence policy. This will lead to a common defence, when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides. The CSDP includes a strong conflict prevention component. Further information and background documents available on: Hwww.consilium.europa.eu/esdpH and Heeas.europa.eu 4.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ituri:Stakes, Actors, Dynamics
    ITURI STAKES, ACTORS, DYNAMICS FEWER/AIP/APFO/CSVR would like to stress that this report is based on the situation observed and information collected between March and August 2003, mainly in Ituri and Kinshasa. The 'current' situation therefore refers to the circumstances that prevailed as of August 2003, when the mission last visited the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. This publication has been produced with the assistance of the Swedish International Development Agency. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Swedish Government and its agencies. This publication has been produced with the assistance of the Department for Development Policy, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Finnish Government and its agencies. Copyright 2003 © Africa Initiative Program (AIP) Africa Peace Forum (APFO) Centre for Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) Forum on Early Warning and Early Response (FEWER) The views expressed by participants in the workshop are not necessarily those held by the workshop organisers and can in no way be take to reflect the views of AIP, APFO, CSVR and FEWER as organisations. 2 List of Acronyms............................................................................................................................... 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Finnish Defence Forces International Centre the Many Faces of Military
    Finnish Defence Forces International Finnish Defence Forces Centre 2 The Many Faces of Military Crisis Management Lessons from the Field Edited by Mikaeli Langinvainio Finnish Defence Forces FINCENT Publication Series International Centre 1:2011 1 FINNISH DEFENCE FORCES INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FINCENT PUBLICATION SERIES 1:2011 The Many Faces of Military Crisis Management Lessons from the Field EDITED BY MIKAELI LANGINVAINIO FINNISH DEFENCE FORCES INTERNATIONAL CENTRE TUUSULA 2011 2 Mikaeli Langinvainio (ed.): The Many Faces of Military Crisis Management Lessons from the Field Finnish Defence Forces International Centre FINCENT Publication Series 1:2011 Cover design: Harri Larinen Layout: Heidi Paananen/TKKK Copyright: Puolustusvoimat, Puolustusvoimien Kansainvälinen Keskus ISBN 978–951–25–2257–6 ISBN 978–951–25–2258–3 (PDF) ISSN 1797–8629 Printed in Finland Juvenens Print Oy Tampere 2011 3 Contents Jukka Tuononen Preface .............................................................................................5 Mikaeli Langinvainio Introduction .....................................................................................8 Mikko Laakkonen Military Crisis Management in the Next Decade (2020–2030) ..............................................................12 Antti Häikiö New Military and Civilian Training - What can they learn from each other? What should they learn together? And what must both learn? .....................................................................................20 Petteri Kurkinen Concept for the PfP Training
    [Show full text]
  • Civil–Military Relations in Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo: a Case Study on Crisis Management in Complex Emergencies
    Chapter 19 Civil–Military Relations in Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo: A Case Study on Crisis Management in Complex Emergencies Gudrun Van Pottelbergh The humanitarian crisis in Kivu in the Democratic Republic of Congo deteriorated again in the second half of 2008. In reaction, the international community agreed to send additional peacekeepers to stabilize the region. Supporters of the Congolese peace process agree that a military reaction alone will however not be sufficient. A stable future of the region requires a combined civil and military approach. This will also necessitate the continuous support of the international community for the Congolese peace process. The European Union and the United States are the two main players in terms of providing disaster management and thus also in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The European Union in particular has set- up several crisis management operations in the country. For the purpose of an efficient and combined effort in disaster relief, this study will investigate how different or similar these two players are in terms of crisis management mechanisms. The chapter concludes that the development of new crisis management mechanisms and the requirements for a sustainable solution in Kivu create an opportunity for all stakeholders described. Through establishing a high- level dialogue, the European Union and the United States could come up with a joint strategic and long- term approach covering all of their instru- ments in place to support the security reform in Kivu. It is especially in this niche of civilian and military cooperation within crisis management operations that may lay a key to finally bring peace and stability in the East of the Democratic Republic of Congo.
    [Show full text]
  • Sample Chapter
    Copyright material – 9781137025746 Contents List of Figures, Tables and Boxes viii Preface to the Second Edition x List of Abbreviations xii Introduction 1 Scope, Rationale and Relevance of the Book 1 The Changing Context of EU Foreign Policy 4 Objectives and Approach 6 Outline of Chapters 6 1 The Nature of EU Foreign Policy 11 Understanding EU Foreign Policy 11 Areas of Tension in EU Foreign Policy 19 Back to the Treaties: Principles and Objectives 25 Relational and Structural Foreign Policy 27 The Globalizing Context of EU Foreign Policy 30 Conclusion 33 2 European Integration and Foreign Policy: Historical Overview 35 European Integration: The Product of a Structural Foreign Policy (1945–52) 35 The First Decades (1952–70): A Taboo on Defence, Decisive Steps on Trade and International Agreements 39 European Political Cooperation: Setting the Stage (1970–93) 42 The Maastricht Treaty (1993) and the Illusory CFSP 46 The Amsterdam Treaty (1999) and ESDP: Moving towards Action 51 Eastern Enlargement (2004/07), the Lisbon Treaty (2009) and New Challenges 55 Conclusion 60 3 The EU’s Foreign Policy System: Actors 61 One Framework, Two Policy-making Methods, or a Continuum? 61 The European Council 63 The Council 66 The Commission 72 The High Representative/Vice-President and the EEAS 77 The European Parliament 85 v Copyright material – 9781137025746 vi Contents The Court of Justice 89 Other Actors 90 Conclusion 93 4 The EU’s Foreign Policy System: Policy-making 94 Competences 94 Decision-making 97 Policy-making in Practice 104 Financing EU Foreign
    [Show full text]
  • Policy Briefs
    Rethinking EU Crisis Management From Battlegroups to a European Legion? Niklas Nováky Summary June 2020 This paper discusses an idea to create a European Legion that has been put forward by Radoslaw Sikorski, MEP. This would be a new kind of EU military unit, made up of volunteers rather than national contingents contributed by the member states. The idea stems from Sikorski’s desire to reform the EU’s existing battlegroups, which have been operational for 15 years but have never been used, despite numerous opportunities. The paper argues that although the EU’s 2007 Lisbon Treaty imposes heavy restrictions on the Union’s ability to deploy military force, it does not rule out conducting operations with a volunteer force. At the same time, a volunteer-based European Legion force would have to be created initially by a group of member states outside the EU framework. These states could then make it available to the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy as, for example, a permanent battlegroup. An existing model would be the multinational Eurocorps. Keywords CSDP – Crisis management – Battlegroups – European Legion – European Council – Eurocorps 1 Introduction Since the EU’s Common (formerly European) Security and Defence Policy (ESDP/CSDP) became operational in 2003, the Union has launched a total of 13 military operations within its framework. Of these, eight have been executive in character, meaning that they were authorised to use force if this had been deemed necessary to fulfil their mandate. The most recent CSDP military operation is Operation IRINI in the Mediterranean, which the EU launched on 31 March 2020 to help enforce the UN’s arms embargo on Libya.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 May Veliko Tarnovo 4Th CSDP Olympiad Booklet.Pdf
    4th COMMON SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY OLYMPIAD Residential phase, 21 - 25 May 2018 at Vasil Levski NMU, Veliko Tarnovo, under the auspices of the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the European Union and the European Security and Defence College, Brussels, Belgium Publication of the Vasil Levski National Military University Editor: Colonel Prof. Dr. Veselin MADANSKI, Colonel Assoc. Prof. Nevena ATANASOVA - KRASTEVA, PhD Language Editor: Senior Instructor Marina RAYKOVA Disclaimer: Any views or opinions presented in this booklet are solely those of the authors. © Vasil Levski National Military University, Veliko Tarnovo, BULGARIA, 2018 ISBN 978-954-753-278-6 2 CONTENTS Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... 3 History of the CSDP Olympiad ................................................................................ 5 History of the Vasil Levski NMU, Veliko Tarnovo ........................................... 8 OPENING CEREMONY SPEECHES ....................................................................... 10 Speech of the Deputy-Minister of the Bulgarian Presidency of the EU Council ................................................................................................................ 10 CSDP Olympiad 2018 – Speech of the Chairman of the IG .......................... 13 Speech of the Head of the ESDC ............................................................................. 15 Speech of the Minister of Defence ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Towards an Eu Strategy for Collective Security
    THE TRANSATLANTIC SOLUTION FOR NATO AGS EADS · GALILEO AVIONICA · GENERAL DYNAMICS CANADA · INDRA · NORTHROP GRUMMAN · THALES TOWARDS AN EU STRATEGY FOR COLLECTIVE SECURITY With media support from An international one day conference organized by the New Defence Agenda, EADS, TIPS and the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. Towards an EU Strategy for Collective Security 3 February 2005, Palais d’Egmont, Brussels I am EADS My name is Aurora del Castillo. I’m in charge of Integrated Logistics Support for military aircraft at EADS CASA, the Spanish partner in the Eurofighter programme. A modern air force isn’t just aircraft, but a complex package of logistics services that range from pilot training and flight simulators to spare parts. My role is to liaise with senior officers from customers’ air forces, determine their needs and ensure these are fulfilled. I remain their key contact long after the aircraft has been delivered. I’m Spanish and European. I’m a woman in what is no longer a man’s world. I am EADS. www.eads.com AIRBUS EUROCOPTER EUROFIGHTER A400M METEOR GALILEO ARIANE The views expressed in this Report are personal opinions and not necessarily the views of the organisations they represent, nor of the New Defence Agenda, its members or sponsors. Contents Reproduction in whole or in part is permitted, providing that full attribution is made to the New Defence Agenda and INTRODUCTION 5 to the source(s) in question, and provided that any such reproduction, whether in whole or in part, is not sold unless Giles Merritt, Director, New Defence Agenda incorporated in other works.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Effectiveness of the United Nations Mission
    Assessing the of the United Nations Mission in the DRC / MONUC – MONUSCO Publisher: Norwegian Institute of International Affairs Copyright: © Norwegian Institute of International Affairs 2019 ISBN: 978-82-7002-346-2 Any views expressed in this publication are those of the author. They should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. The text may not be re-published in part or in full without the permission of NUPI and the authors. Visiting address: C.J. Hambros plass 2d Address: P.O. Box 8159 Dep. NO-0033 Oslo, Norway Internet: effectivepeaceops.net | www.nupi.no E-mail: [email protected] Fax: [+ 47] 22 99 40 50 Tel: [+ 47] 22 99 40 00 Assessing the Effectiveness of the UN Missions in the DRC (MONUC-MONUSCO) Lead Author Dr Alexandra Novosseloff, International Peace Institute (IPI), New York and Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI), Oslo Co-authors Dr Adriana Erthal Abdenur, Igarapé Institute, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Prof. Thomas Mandrup, Stellenbosch University, South Africa, and Royal Danish Defence College, Copenhagen Aaron Pangburn, Social Science Research Council (SSRC), New York Data Contributors Paul von Chamier, Center on International Cooperation (CIC), New York University, New York EPON Series Editor Dr Cedric de Coning, NUPI External Reference Group Dr Tatiana Carayannis, SSRC, New York Lisa Sharland, Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Canberra Dr Charles Hunt, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, Australia Adam Day, Centre for Policy Research, UN University, New York Cover photo: UN Photo/Sylvain Liechti UN Photo/ Abel Kavanagh Contents Acknowledgements 5 Acronyms 7 Executive Summary 13 The effectiveness of the UN Missions in the DRC across eight critical dimensions 14 Strategic and Operational Impact of the UN Missions in the DRC 18 Constraints and Challenges of the UN Missions in the DRC 18 Current Dilemmas 19 Introduction 21 Section 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Enter the EU Battlegroups
    Chaillot Paper February 2007 n°97 Enter the EU Battlegroups Gustav Lindstrom cp97-cover.qxp 29/03/2007 16:09 Page 2 Chaillot Paper Paper Chaillot n° 97 In January 2002 the Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) became an autonomous Paris-based agency of the Enter the EU Battlegroups European Union. Following an EU Council Joint Action of 20 July 2001, it is now an integral part of the new structures that will support the further develop- ment of the CFSP/ESDP. The Institute’s core mission is to provide analyses and recommendations that can be of use and relevance to the formulation of the European security and defence policy. In carrying out that mission, it also acts as an interface between European experts and decision-makers at all levels. Chaillot Papers are monographs on topical questions written either by a member of the EUISS research team or by outside authors chosen and commissioned by the Institute. Early drafts are normally discussed at a semi- nar or study group of experts convened by the Institute and publication indicates that the paper is considered by the EUISS as a useful and authoritative contribution to the debate on CFSP/ESDP. Responsibility for the views expressed in them lies exclusively with authors. Gustav Lindstrom Chaillot Papers are also accessible via the Institute’s Website: www.iss.europa.eu cp97.qxp 29/03/2007 16:05 Page 1 Chaillot Paper February 2007 n°97 Enter the EU Battlegroups Gustav Lindstrom Institute for Security Studies European Union Paris cp97.qxp 29/03/2007 16:05 Page 2 Institute for Security Studies European Union 43 avenue du Président Wilson 75775 Paris cedex 16 tel.: +33 (0)1 56 89 19 30 fax: +33 (0)1 56 89 19 31 e-mail: [email protected] www.iss.europa.eu Director: Nicole Gnesotto © EU Institute for Security Studies 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • EU Diplomacy Papers Sweden and The
    Sweden and the Development of the European Security and Defence Policy: A Bi-Directional Process of Europeanisation EU Diplomacy Papers 5 / 2008 Fredrick Lee-Ohlsson Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies www.coleurope.eu Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies EU Diplomacy Papers 5/2008 Sweden and the Development of the European Security and Defence Policy: A Bi-Directional Process of Europeanisation Fredrick Lee-Ohlsson © Fredrick Lee-Ohlsson 2008 Dijver 11 | BE-8000 Bruges, Belgium | Tel. +32 (0)50 477 251 | Fax +32 (0)50 477 111 | E-mail [email protected] | www.coleurope.eu/ird Fredrick Lee-Ohlsson About the Author Fredrick Lee-Ohlsson is Academic Assistant in the Department of EU International Re- lations and Diplomacy Studies of the College of Europe in Bruges since August 2007. He holds a Master’s degree in European Studies and Political Science from Göteborg University (2006), a Certificat d’Etudes Politiques Européennes from the Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Strasbourg (2003) as well as a Master’s degree in EU Interna- tional Relations and Diplomacy Studies from the College of Europe, Bruges (2007, Copernicus Promotion). He carried out an internship at the Swedish Ministry for For- eign Affairs, Department of European Security Policy (2005), and then served as a desk officer in charge of NATO/PfP and OSCE (2005), external energy policy (2006) and ESDP operations (2007). Editorial Team: David Bonvicini, Sieglinde Gstöhl, Yannick Hartstein, Fredrick Lee-Ohlsson, Dieter Mahncke Dijver 11 | BE-8000 Bruges, Belgium | Tel. +32 (0)50 477 251 | Fax +32 (0)50 477 250 | E-mail [email protected] | www.coleurope.eu/ird Views expressed in the EU Diplomacy Papers are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect positions of either the series editors or the College of Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • EU Policies in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Try and Fail? Koen Vlassenroot and Valerie Arnould
    EU Policies in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Try and Fail? Koen Vlassenroot and Valerie Arnould Paper commissioned by the Human Security Study Group SiT/WP/06/16 Koen Vlassenroot is Professor of Political Science and Director of the Conflict Research Group at Ghent University. He is also Director of the Africa Programme of the Egmont Institute. His research focuses on dynamics of conflict and issues of justice and security in Central Africa. He has written numerous book chapters and articles on militias, land access, rebel governance and state-building. His current research projects are on access to justice and security and on access to justice for displaced people in DR Congo. Valerie Arnould is Senior Research Fellow with the Africa Programme at the Egmont - Royal Institute for International Relations. She is also a Visiting Lecturer at the Brussels School of International Studies, Kent University. Her areas of expertise are transitional justice, political and security dynamics in Central Africa, and peacebuilding. Contact Koen Vlassenroot: [email protected] Valerie Arnould: [email protected] Security in Transition February 2016, London 2 Abstract This paper argues that even though EU policies in the DRC integrated different components of human security – namely human rights protection, the restoration of law and order, and effective multilateralism – in practice these policies have had mixed success in realizing the objective of human security. This can be explained by three main reasons: (i) EU policies are
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Pillars
    Breaking Pillars Towards a civil-military security approach for the European Union Margriet Drent & Dick Zandee Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ January 2010 CIP-Data Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Den Haag Drent, M. & Zandee, D. Breaking Pillars; Towards a civil-military security approach for the European Union The Hague, Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. ISBN/EAN: 978-90-5031-149-6 Desktop publishing by: Karin van Egmond Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael Clingendael 7 2597 VH Den Haag Phone: +31 (0)70 – 3245384 Fax: +31 (0)70 – 3746667 P.O.Box 93080 2509 AB Den Haag E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.clingendael.nl © Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright holders. Clingendael Institute, P.O. Box 93080, 2509 AB The Hague, The Netherlands Contents 1. Introduction.................................................................................... 1 2. A comprehensive approach: combining the EU's civilian and military strengths ......................................................................................... 5 2.1 The EU’s comprehensive approach: background and main concepts.......................................................................................... 8 2.2
    [Show full text]